Under the decision of the California Supreme Court in Strauss v. Horton, would the following change to the state constitution be an amendment or a revision?
Reserving the official designation of the term 'marriage' for the union of opposite-sex couples of the same race, but leaving undisturbed all of the other extremely significant substantive aspects of an interracial couples's state constitutional right to establish an officially recognized and protected family relationship and the guarantee of equal protection of the laws.
Assume, for purposes of your answer, that the state supreme court has previously declared that the right of interracial couples to marry, including the designation "marriage," is fundamental. Assume also that the court has declared racial classifications invidious and thus subject to strict judicial scrutiny.
In your answer, be sure to discuss whether the proposed change would have a substantial or, indeed, even minimal effect on the governmental plan or framework of California.
Do not consider whether the change would violate the federal constitution. Also, do not discuss whether the change would be wise or sound as a matter of policy or whether you, as an individual, believe it should be part of the California Constitution.
Finally, you may not consult Eugene's answer, below.